Welcome to Newburytoday.co.uk’s message boards where you can have your say and share your views on any number of issues.

Anyone can read messages, but only registered users can post messages, reply to messages or create new topics. As part of the free and simple registration, you will be asked to read and conform to the house rules.

According to the NWN, it would seem the possibility of a claw-back of the grant for the control tower is conditional! It might not come as much of a surprise to see Julian Swift-Hook citing 'legal professional privilege' as the reason why the meeting to discuss the apparent discrepancy in the wording of the council's press release and SIB's letter was made private.

According to the NWN, it would seem the possibility of a claw-back of the grant for the control tower is conditional! It might not come as much of a surprise to see Julian Swift-Hook citing 'legal professional privilege' as the reason why the meeting to discuss the apparent discrepancy in the wording of the council's press release and SIB's letter was made private.

Can you give the background to this AC, I haven't seen the NWN. who's threatening to claw back what, and what statements are in disagreement.

I note also from the GPC "consultation" that GPC are claiming to be legally obliged to complete CT, but that looks likely to be untrue and will materially affect how people feel about supporting the completion.

The "consultation" is also phrased to be deliberately misleading by giving the impression that Greenham precept payers won't be paying for the project, and they certainly are.

SIB (Social Investment Business) could still claw back £421.555 if the council fails to meet a strict set of conditions within a three month deadline.

SIB say the budget headings have not been adhered to and the schedule has slipped which technically is an event of default.

JSH said the council believes the terms of the grant were adhered to and are still talking to SIB about it.

GPC recently issued a statement which said SIB "is not seeking repayment". SIB's letter actually states: "it is not our intention at this time to pursue clawback of the grant amount".

JSH claims the prezzer is simply a semantic issue and was not meant to mislead and that the statement was technically correct at the time of issue.

At a meeting the apparent discrepancy between the letter and the notice was an agenda item, but it was held behind close doors for the sake of 'legal professional privilege'. Chairman Jon Gage said the meeting was taken to part 2 (no public or press) after legal advice.

Cllr Gary Puffett is uncomfortable with the wording issue and was frustrated the meeting was taken to part 2.

In my view the council have lied by omission in the statement; also known as spin. All completely unnecessary.

No way would I vote Lib Dem, nor Tory for that matter, while we have the people like those in the council at the moment. I just don't understand how these people can keep making such 'schoolboy' errors!

I can only think it was an attempt to cool the nerves of those who are stakeholders and suppliers of the project; however, this seems a rather foolish thing to do bearing in mind the information is publicly available, thus, only increasing the possibility of distrust in the council.

In my view the council have lied by omission in the statement; also known as spin. All completely unnecessary.

No way would I vote Lib Dem, nor Tory for that matter, while we have the people like those in the council at the moment. I just don't understand how these people can keep making such 'schoolboy' errors!

I can only think it was an attempt to cool the nerves of those who are stakeholders and suppliers of the project; however, this seems a rather foolish thing to do bearing in mind the information is publicly available, thus, only increasing the possibility of distrust in the council.

Because in the great scheme of things it does not matter. JSH is back where he was - and no doubt it will be trebles all round.

Personally, I'm waiting for the CT to be finished. I can then buy it at a knock down price, fully refurbished with tax payer cash - shortly after the cafe & museum closes due to financial unviability.

Because in the great scheme of things it does not matter. JSH is back where he was - and no doubt it will be trebles all round.

Personally, I'm waiting for the CT to be finished. I can then buy it at a knock down price, fully refurbished with tax payer cash - shortly after the cafe & museum closes due to financial unviability.

Oh yea of little faith? All the thousands of customers that are going to flock to the New Vicky Park cafe, even in winter, will surely trudge up to Greenham afterwards for another wedge and a brew to see two of Newbury's main attractions won't they? Yes Swift Half has invested Greenham precept payers wisely that is why there are no complaints from them obviously?

Oh yea of little faith? All the thousands of customers that are going to flock to the New Vicky Park cafe, even in winter, will surely trudge up to Greenham afterwards for another wedge and a brew to see two of Newbury's main attractions won't they? Yes Swift Half has invested Greenham precept payers wisely that is why there are no complaints from them obviously?

Hmm, I don't know. The CT needs something special to draw the crowds. I know - a flag pole, that will do it!

Oh yea of little faith? All the thousands of customers that are going to flock to the New Vicky Park cafe, even in winter, will surely trudge up to Greenham afterwards for another wedge and a brew to see two of Newbury's main attractions won't they? Yes Swift Half has invested Greenham precept payers wisely that is why there are no complaints from them obviously?

What about some nice uniforms for the museum Guides? I'm sure funds would run to a gold braided one for the Council Chair, who will doubtless have a ceremonial oversight role once it's open.

Mind, with what's going on Worldwide right now, the Yanks might want it back in short order Perhaps JS-H knew all along?

Shame the runway has gone it would save a lot of lorry transports carrying all the cheese and ham for the wedges that will be needed to be sold to cover the running costs, they could have flown them in?

What about some nice uniforms for the museum Guides? I'm sure funds would run to a gold braided one for the Council Chair, who will doubtless have a ceremonial oversight role once it's open.

Council Chair? Oh no, that won't do, the position needs a title with far more prestige than that - not for the benefit of the incumbent obviously, but the dignity and bearing of Greenham demands something more worthy, more worshipful - that's it, Greenham needs a Mayor!

Council Chair? Oh no, that won't do, the position needs needs a title with far more prestige than that - not for the benefit of the incumbent obviously, but the dignity and bearing of Greenham demands something more worthy, more worshipful - that's it's, Greenham needs a Mayor!

I can see it happening. Once the ward boundaries are finalised, Greenham will end up big enough to be called a Town. Yes, an early act will be to go for a Mayor, using your post as evidence of public demand on social media!

According to the NWN, it would seem the possibility of a claw-back of the grant for the control tower is conditional! It might not come as much of a surprise to see Julian Swift-Hook citing 'legal professional privilege' as the reason why the meeting to discuss the apparent discrepancy in the wording of the council's press release and SIB's letter was made private.

13 days to go. The threat is that the Social Investment Business will demand repayment of the £421,555 that they granted GPC if the council can't supply the SIB with a "clear and realistic plan" of how the remainder of the project will be financed, and while GPC's plan has been to borrow £100k from the Public Works Loan Board to complete the project, they had been knocked back on their first application and six weeks into the three month period of notice set by the SIB they had still not made a successful application so it would be interesting to see how they're getting on. Getting a loan from the PWLB is simple enough, but a council does need to provide evidence that they have the necessary power to spend the money, and this is a bit of a challenge for GPC because there is no statutory power for a parish council to spend £830k on a cafe and interpretation centre. Interesting to see how this goes.

Interesting letter in this week's NWN from our incumbent MP pouring a large bucket of cold water over the project. More interesting is the criticisim from a very senior local Tory now. Why haven't they said anything before?

Interesting letter in this week's NWN from our incumbent MP pouring a large bucket of cold water over the project. More interesting is the criticisim from a very senior local Tory now. Why haven't they said anything before?

Quite. I have also read the clerk has jacked it in for 'personal reasons': FTFAGOS springs to mind.

Cllr Billy Drummond is claiming in a newsletter that GPC will be saving the tax-payer money by moving the parish office into the Tower of Control and paying rent to the third-party operating company. I'm wondering though whether there will be any saving here as I wasn't aware that GPC currently rented a parish office anywhere else, and it's hardly a saving if they pay rent on a room in the ToC when they already own it. What it looks like is a cynical ploy to help the ToC look solvent on paper by subsidising it on the sly.